Turkey, August 2008

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Turkey, August 2008 Library of Congress – Federal Research Division Country Profile: Turkey, August 2008 COUNTRY PROFILE: TURKEY August 2008 COUNTRY Formal Name: Republic of Turkey (Turkiye Cumhuriyeti). Short Form: Turkey. Term for Citizen(s): Turk(s). Click to Enlarge Image Capital: Ankara. Other Major Cities: Istanbul, İzmir (Smyrna), Bursa, Adana, Gaziantep, and Konya (in order of size). Independence: Turkey celebrates October 29, 1923, the date on which the Republic of Turkey was declared after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, as its date of independence. Public Holidays: New Year’s Day (January 1), National Sovereignty and Children’s Day (April 23), Commemoration of Atatürk and Youth and Sports Day (May 19), Victory Day (August 30), the End of Ramadan (September 30–October 2, 2008; variable date determined by the Islamic calendar), Republic Day (October 29), and the Feast of the Sacrifice (December 8–11, 2008; variable date determined by the Islamic calendar). Flag: The flag has a red background with a white crescent, open to the right, on the left side and a five-pointed white star in the center. The precise origin of the crescent and star symbols, which are quite ancient in the Middle East, is unknown. The flag is an adaptation of the flag of the Ottoman Empire, which preceded the modern Turkish Click to Enlarge Image state. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The history of the geographic area occupied by the modern state of Turkey and the history of the peoples who occupy that state are quite different. Linking the two is the history of the Ottoman Empire. That empire was a vast, pan-Islamic state that expanded, beginning in the fourteenth century, from a small Turkish emirate located within the boundaries of the present-day Republic of Turkey to include holdings across North Africa, southeastern Europe, and most of the Middle East. Prehistory and Early History: The land mass occupied by the Asian part of the Republic of Turkey, east of the Sea of Marmara, is known as Anatolia. The region was inhabited by an 1 Library of Congress – Federal Research Division Country Profile: Turkey, August 2008 advanced Neolithic culture as early as the seventh millennium B.C., and metal instruments were in use by 2500 B.C. Late in the third millennium B.C., the warrior Hittites invaded Anatolia and established an empire that made significant economic and administrative advancements. In about 1200 B.C., the Phrygians overthrew the Hittites in western Anatolia, where a Phrygian kingdom then ruled until the seventh century B.C. That kingdom was succeeded by a Lydian kingdom, which in turn was conquered by the Persians in 546 B.C. Meanwhile, beginning in about 1050 B.C., Ionian Greeks began founding cities along the Aegean coast of Anatolia, and in the eighth century B.C., peoples such as the Armenians and the Kurds moved into eastern Anatolia. In the late fourth century B.C., Alexander the Great of Macedonia conquered all of Anatolia. One of the city-states that Alexander founded, Pergamum, became a unique center of wealth and culture. In 133 B.C., Pergamum became the center of a Roman province and remained a cultural center for several centuries. In 330 A.D., the Roman emperor Constantine established the capital of the Greek-speaking half of his empire at Byzantium, on the Sea of Marmara. The city was renamed Constantinople, and the eastern half of the Roman Empire became known as the Byzantine Empire. With its center in Anatolia, the Byzantine Empire remained a powerful entity until the eleventh century. The Patriarchiate of Constantinople, established in the fourth century, represented the Greek-speaking Roman Empire in the Christian church. Turkish tribes began to migrate westward from China and Central Asia in the seventh century A.D. In 1071 Seljuk Turkish forces defeated a Byzantine army at Manzikert and then occupied all of Anatolia. In the next few centuries, several Seljuk states were established. Gazi warriors, tribal horsemen charged with defending the Seljuk frontier, pushed relentlessly westward, and Seljuk governments eventually followed. In 1097 the Christian world responded to this movement with the first in a series of religiously inspired military crusades, which reclaimed part of Anatolia. However, in the next two centuries what was left of the Byzantine Empire fragmented. In the fourteenth century, a new power, the Osmanli Dynasty, came to dominate Anatolia. The Ottoman Empire: Troops of the Osmanli Dynasty, which gave its name to the Ottoman Empire, moved rapidly into southeastern Europe, defeating Serbian forces at the battle of Kosovo in 1389. Although they were temporarily halted when the Mongol forces of Timur occupied part of Anatolia in the early fifteenth century, in 1453 Ottoman forces captured Constantinople, the last outpost of the Byzantine Empire. The Ottomans renamed Constantinople Istanbul and made it the capital of a new empire and the seat of Sunni Islam as well as Greek Orthodoxy. Under Süleyman the Magnificent (r. 1520–66), the empire expanded across North Africa to Morocco, farther into southeastern Europe, and across the Middle Eastern regions of Kurdistan and Mesopotamia. However, after Süleyman’s death the empire began showing signs of decay. The Ottoman navy lost the key Battle of Lepanto to Spanish and Portuguese forces in 1571, and succession struggles shook Istanbul. Under the leadership of the Köprülü family, the empire made its final push into Europe in the seventeenth century. The siege of Vienna, which was lifted in 1683, marked the farthest extent of Ottoman penetration into Europe. In the years that followed, a multinational European force drove Ottoman troops southward and eastward, forcing the empire to cede substantial territory in Europe in the Treaty of Karlowicz (1699). In the early eighteenth century, Russian Tsar Peter I initiated a long-lasting goal of Russian foreign policy, to gain access to warm-water ports at the 2 Library of Congress – Federal Research Division Country Profile: Turkey, August 2008 expense of the Ottoman Empire. During the next two centuries, Russia fought several wars to diminish Ottoman power. In 1774 the Treaty of Kuchuk-Kaynarja gained Russian ships access to Ottoman waterways. By the nineteenth century, the Ottoman Empire had become known as “the sick man of Europe.” The decay of its vast holdings and the nationalist forces that were unleashed in the empire were central issues for all European governments. In 1832 the European powers forced the Ottoman government to recognize Greek independence after a decade-long Greek guerrilla war. However, Europe also recognized the need to avoid the complete destruction of the empire. In the Crimean War of 1854–56, France and Britain sided with the Ottoman Empire against Russia, which lost the war and ceded some of its power in southeastern Europe. In 1878 the Treaty of Berlin established the independent states of Bulgaria, Romania, and Serbia from former Ottoman territory. In the same period, Britain took possession of Cyprus and Egypt, and France occupied Algeria and Tunisia, further diminishing Ottoman holdings. Internal conditions also deteriorated in the nineteenth century. Under pressure from the West, between 1839 and 1876 the Ottoman government undertook a series of reforms, collectively known as Tanzimat. Dissatisfaction with reforms stimulated the Young Ottoman movement, which sought Western-style reforms, including secular government and closer relations with Europe. However, in the late 1870s Sultan Abdül Hamid II stifled the reform movement and established a repressive regime. Meanwhile, the empire’s financial and geopolitical positions worsened. In the early 1900s, reformist groups remained active under the repression of Abdül Hamid II. In 1907 the Committee of Union and Progress, better known as the Young Turks, united under military officer Mustafa Kemal, who later took the name Atatürk, “father of the Turks.” Between 1909 and 1912, European powers took advantage of a weak Ottoman government to occupy or liberate most of the empire’s remaining territory in southeastern Europe. In 1912 the First Balkan War deprived the empire of territory in Macedonia and Thrace. In 1913 these losses led to the overthrow of the government by Enver Pasha, who headed a dictatorial regime of Young Turks during the ensuing war period. The empire regained some European territory during the Second Balkan War of 1913. When World War I broke out in Europe in 1914, Enver Pasha’s alliance with Germany caused Britain, France, and Russia to declare war on the Ottoman Empire. In early 1915, mass deportation of the Armenian population led to the death of as many as 1 million Armenians, an event that remains controversial nearly 100 years later. Atatürk defeated a British amphibious landing at Gallipoli on the Dardanelles later that year. However, in 1916 a successful British campaign cut through the empire’s Arab territory, capturing Damascus in 1918. After the empire had suffered numerous defeats, a provisional Ottoman government sued for peace with the Allies. The Republic of Turkey: After World War I, the provisional government retained control over very little of the former empire. Atatürk led strong nationalist forces seeking to retain Anatolia. In 1921 the nationalists elected Atatürk president of a new government, the Grand National Assembly. In 1922 Atatürk’s army repulsed an invading Greek force seeking to expand Greece’s 3 Library of Congress – Federal Research Division Country Profile: Turkey, August 2008 postwar allotment of Ottoman territory. The 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, negotiated between the Atatürk government and the Allies, defined control of the Bosporus and the territorial extent of the new Republic of Turkey. Atatürk’s reform program, which became known as Kemalism, aimed at establishing a secular, Europe-oriented state. European name forms and dress styles were encouraged, and the Latin alphabet was adopted. All links between Islam and the state were cut.
Recommended publications
  • Drip Tectonics and the Enigmatic Uplift of the Central Anatolian Plateau
    ARTICLE DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-01611-3 OPEN Drip tectonics and the enigmatic uplift of the Central Anatolian Plateau Oğuz H. Göğüş 1, Russell N. Pysklywec2, A.M.C. Şengör1 & Erkan Gün 1,2 Lithospheric drips have been interpreted for various regions around the globe to account for the recycling of the continental lithosphere and rapid plateau uplift. However, the validity of such hypothesis is not well documented in the context of geological, geophysical and 1234567890 petrological observations that are tested against geodynamical models. Here we propose that the folding of the Central Anatolian (Kırşehir) arc led to thickening of the lithosphere and onset of “dripping” of the arc root. Our geodynamic model explains the seismic data showing missing lithosphere and a remnant structure characteristic of a dripping arc root, as well as enigmatic >1 km uplift over the entire plateau, Cappadocia and Galatia volcanism at the southern and northern plateau margins since ~10 Ma, respectively. Models show that arc root removal yields initial surface subsidence that inverts >1 km of uplift as the vertical loading and crustal deformation change during drip evolution. 1 Eurasia Institute of Earth Sciences, Istanbul Technical University, Maslak, 34469 Istanbul, Turkey. 2 Department of Earth Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5S 3B1. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to O.H.G (email: [email protected]) NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 8: 1538 | DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-01611-3 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications 1 ARTICLE NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-01611-3 he tectonic evolution of the Mediterranean involves a 2Ma—across entire Central Anatolia, although the rate and complex array of subduction, collision, and back-arc magnitude in the north and south is 5 and 10 times higher than in T 17 spreading events in relation to ongoing northward the central section of the plateau, respectively .
    [Show full text]
  • Can Cypriot Gas Power a New Dialogue?
    APHRODITE’S GIFT: CAN CYPRIOT GAS POWER A NEW DIALOGUE? Europe Report N°216 – 2 April 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... i I. INTRODUCTION: REUNIFICATION TALKS STALL ............................................. 1 II. THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN GAS BONANZA ............................................. 3 A. GREEK CYPRIOTS GO IT ALONE ................................................................................................... 3 B. TURKEY ESCALATES TENSIONS ................................................................................................... 5 C. INTERNATIONAL REACTIONS ........................................................................................................ 7 III. THE LEGAL CONTEXT ................................................................................................. 9 A. THE LAW OF THE SEA .................................................................................................................. 9 B. SOVEREIGN RIGHTS VS. EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION ................................................................... 10 IV. CASHING IN THE WINDFALL................................................................................... 12 A. GAS EXPLOITATION ................................................................................................................... 13 B. GAS TRANSPORT .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Segment Structure of the Southern Strand of the North Anatolian Fault System and Paleoseismic Behaviour of the Gemlik Fault, NW Anatolia
    Segment Structure of the Southern Strand of the North Anatolian Fault System and Paleoseismic Behaviour of the Gemlik Fault, NW Anatolia Selim Özalp, Ömer Emre and Ahmet Doğan General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA), Department of Geological Research 06520, Ankara, Turkey The North Anatolian Fault System (NAFS) is a transform fault that accommodates relative motion between Anatolian and Black Sea microplates. The NAFS bifurcates two strands as the Northern and the Southern in the Marmara region. Recent lateral motion is about 24 mm/yr along the NAFS. According to the recent GPS data, there is a slip partitioning between both strands and the northern strand carries approximately 3 times as much right-lateral motion as does the southern strand. Therefore we interpret that the northern strand is the master zone which accommodate majority of the recent lateral motion. In this study, the southern strand is extending between Dokurcun valley and Bandırma bay is evaluated as a splay instead of a main strand diverging from the NAFS as described in previous studies. This splay is included in NW Anatolia transition zone which characterizes bend structures. Length of the southern strand is about 140 km between Dokurcun valley and Gemlik bay along Pamukova basin, Lake İznik and Gemlik Bay depressions. The strand can be divided into three main geometric segments in right steeping pattern. Those are Geyve, İznik and Gemlik, from east to west. Length of the Geyve Fault is about 57 km and general trend is N70°E. The İznik Fault is about 56 km-long trending of N75°E.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations
    Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations Updated November 9, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R41368 SUMMARY R41368 Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations November 9, 2020 U.S.-Turkey tensions have raised questions about the future of bilateral relations and have led to congressional action against Turkey, including informal holds on major new Jim Zanotti arms sales (such as upgrades to F-16 aircraft) and efforts to impose sanctions. Specialist in Middle Nevertheless, both countries’ officials emphasize the importance of continued U.S.- Eastern Affairs Turkey cooperation and Turkey’s membership in NATO. Observers voice concerns about the largely authoritarian rule of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Clayton Thomas Turkey’s polarized electorate could affect Erdogan’s future leadership. His biggest Analyst in Middle Eastern challenge may be structural weaknesses in Turkey’s economy—including a sharp Affairs decline in Turkey’s currency—that have worsened since the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic began. The following are key factors in the U.S.-Turkey relationship. Turkey’s strategic orientation and U.S./NATO basing. Traditionally, Turkey has relied closely on the United States and NATO for defense cooperation, European countries for trade and investment, and Russia and Iran for energy imports. A number of complicated situations in Turkey’s surrounding region—including those involving Syria, Libya, Nagorno-Karabakh (a region disputed by Armenia and Azerbaijan), and Eastern Mediterranean energy exploration—affect its relationships with the United States and other key actors, as Turkey seeks a more independent role. President Erdogan’s concerns about maintaining his parliamentary coalition with Turkish nationalists may partly explain his actions in some of the situations mentioned above.
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling of the Turkish Strait System Using a High Resolution Unstructured Grid Ocean Circulation Model
    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Article Modeling of the Turkish Strait System Using a High Resolution Unstructured Grid Ocean Circulation Model Mehmet Ilicak 1,* , Ivan Federico 2 , Ivano Barletta 2,3 , Sabri Mutlu 4 , Haldun Karan 4 , Stefania Angela Ciliberti 2 , Emanuela Clementi 5 , Giovanni Coppini 2 and Nadia Pinardi 3 1 Eurasia Institute of Earth Sciences, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul 34469, Turkey 2 Fondazione Centro Euro-Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici, Ocean Predictions and Applications Division, 73100 Lecce, Italy; [email protected] (I.F.); [email protected] (I.B.); [email protected] (S.A.C.); [email protected] (G.C.) 3 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Universita di Bologna Alma Mater Studiorum, 40126 Bologna, Italy; [email protected] 4 TUBITAK MRC Environment and Cleaner Production Institute, Kocaeli 41470, Turkey; [email protected] (S.M.); [email protected] (H.K.) 5 Fondazione Centro Euro-Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici, Ocean Modeling and Data Assimilation Division, 40126 Bologna, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The Turkish Strait System, which is the only connection between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, is a challenging region for ocean circulation models due to topographic constraints and water mass structure. We present a newly developed high resolution unstructured finite element grid model to simulate the Turkish Strait System using realistic atmospheric forcing and lateral open boundary conditions. We find that the jet flowing from the Bosphorus Strait into the Marmara creates Citation: Ilicak, M.; Federico, I.; an anticyclonic circulation. The eddy kinetic energy field is high around the jets exiting from the Barletta, I.; Mutlu, S.; Karan, H.; Ciliberti, S.A.; Clementi, E.; Coppini, Bosphorus Strait, Dardanelles Strait, and also the leeward side of the islands in the Marmara Sea.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Issue “The Next Marmara Earthquake: Disaster Mitigation
    Hori et al. Earth, Planets and Space (2017) 69:65 DOI 10.1186/s40623-017-0648-9 PREFACE Open Access Special issue “The next Marmara earthquake: disaster mitigation, recovery, and early warning” Takane Hori1*, Ali Pinar2, Ocal Necmioglu2, Muneo Hori3 and Azusa Nishizawa4 Te Marmara Sea, accommodating the fault segments of with Mw = 7.25 on the Main Marmara Fault is expected a major transform fault, is well known as a seismic gap to heavily damage or destroy 2–4% of the near 1,000,000 along the North Anatolian Fault (NAF), running through buildings in Istanbul, which has a population of around the northern part of Turkey and connecting the East 13 million, with 9–15% of the buildings receiving Anatolian convergent area with the Hellenic subduction medium damage and 20–34% of the buildings lightly zone (e.g., Pınar 1943; Toksöz et al. 1979; Pondard et al. damaged (Erdik 2013). 2007; Şengör et al. 2014). It is obvious from historical Te aim of this special issue is to gather information records spanning more than 2000 years that the region about the risk of another Marmara earthquake from the is subject to frequent strong shaking that is likely associ- latest geophysical, geological, geotechnical, computa- ated with tsunami waves, threatening heavily populated tional, and building science research results to discuss and industrialized locations (Ambraseys 2002; Erdik et al. ways of mitigating disaster in advance. Te collection 2004; Hébert et al. 2005). In the twentieth century, mag- of 12 papers constituting this special issue is based on nitude (M) 7-class earthquakes sequentially occurred recent research on imaging the crustal structure, the from east to west along the NAF zone, as shown in Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Urbanization Dynamics in Turkey's Marmara Region Using CORINE Data Between 2006 and 2018
    remote sensing Article Assessing Urbanization Dynamics in Turkey’s Marmara Region Using CORINE Data between 2006 and 2018 Özlem Altınkaya Genel 1,2 and ChengHe Guan 3,4,* 1 Kenniscentrum NoorderRuimte, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen Zernikeplein 1, 9747 AS Groningen, The Netherlands; [email protected] 2 Faculty of Architecture and Design, Özye˘ginUniversity, Orman Sk.13, Istanbul˙ 34794, Turkey 3 Arts and Sciences, New York University Shanghai, 1555 Century Avenue, Pudong New District, Shanghai 200122, China 4 Shanghai Key Laboratory of Urban Renewal and Spatial Optimization Technology, Tongji University, Shanghai 200122, China * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: This study investigated the urban growth dynamics of urban regions. The study area was the Marmara Region, one of the most densely populated and ecologically diverse areas in Turkey. Using CORINE land cover data for 2006, 2012, and 2018, the study utilized multiple correspondence analyses and cluster analyses, to analyze land cover changes. The resulting maps, visualized in GIS, revealed the rapid urban transformation of the regional structure, formerly comprised of four distinct areas, into a more complex structure, in which densification and sprawl occur simultaneously. Our findings demonstrated a dissonance between the spatial dynamics of the Marmara Region during the study period, and the capacity and scope of the simultaneously initiated regional policies and mega-projects. This uncoordinated approach has endangered the region’s sustainable development. The paper, therefore, discusses the importance of land use planning and transboundary collaboration Citation: Genel, Ö.A.; Guan, C. for sustainable regional development. Beyond the local case, the results contribute to critical theories Assessing Urbanization Dynamics in in regional planning by linking theory and practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey and Black Sea Security 3
    SIPRI Background Paper December 2018 TURKEY AND SUMMARY w The Black Sea region is BLACK SEA SECURITY experiencing a changing military balance. The six littoral states (Bulgaria, siemon t. wezeman and alexandra kuimova* Georgia, Romania, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine) intensified their efforts to build up their military potential after Russia’s The security environment in the wider Black Sea region—which brings takeover of Crimea and the together the six littoral states (Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Russia, Turkey start of the internationalized and Ukraine) and a hinterland including the South Caucasus and Moldova— civil war in eastern Ukraine is rapidly changing. It combines protracted conflicts with a significant con- in 2014. ventional military build-up that intensified after the events of 2014: Russia’s Although security in the takeover of Crimea and the start of the internationalized civil war in eastern Black Sea region has always Ukraine.1 Transnational connections between conflicts across the region been and remains important for and between the Black Sea and the Middle East add further dimensions of Turkey, the current Turkish insecurity. As a result, there is a blurring of the conditions of peace, crisis defence policy seems to be and conflict in the region. This has led to an unpredictable and potentially largely directed southwards, high-risk environment in which military forces with advanced weapons, towards the Middle East. including nuclear-capable systems, are increasingly active in close proxim- Russian–Turkish relations have been ambiguous for some years. ity to each other. Turkey has openly expressed In this context, there is an urgent need to develop a clearer understanding concern about perceived of the security dynamics and challenges facing the wider Black Sea region, Russian ambitions in the Black and to explore opportunities for dialogue between the key regional security Sea region and called for a actors.
    [Show full text]
  • Scanned by Scan2net
    Ulud. Uniu. Zir. Fak. Derg. , (1986) 5: 19-26 GENERAL ASPECT OF HORTICULTURE IN BURSA Atilla ERİŞ* Vedat ŞEN1Z * * Arif SOYLU*** SUM MARY Bursa has a special place in Turkey from the horticultural point of uiew. Fruit species such as oliue, peach, grcıp e , apple, plum, pear, cherry, walnut, chest­ niıt, fig, strawberry and quince and almost all summer and w in ter uegetable specieı that haue important additiues to total production of Turkey are grown in this uicinity extensiuely. Vegetable species such as tomato, bean, pepper and pea whiciı especially processedin industry, and o nion are produced much than others. In this study, current aspect of horticulture in Bursa prouince was identi{ied; and its economic dimensions and technical problems were explained. ÖZET bursa 'da Bahçe Bitkileri Tanınının Genel Durumu Bahçe bitkileri yetiştiriciliğ i açısından Bursa 'nın Türkiye 'de özel bir yeri uar­ dır. Yörede Türkiye toplam üretimine önemli katkıları olan zeytin, şeftali, üzüm, elmd, erik, armut, kiraz, ceuiz, k eıtan e , incir, çilek ue ayua gibi meyue türleri ile he­ men hemen tüm yazlık ue kışlık sebze türleri çok yaygın olarak yetiştirilmektedir. Sebzelerden bilha11a sanayide çok iş lene n domates, fasulye, biber, bezelye gibi türler ile soğan · diğ erlerinde n daha da fazla üretilmektedir. Bu çalış mada bahçe bitkilerinin Bursa y ö reıind eki m eucut durumu tan ı tıl ­ mış , ekonomik boyutları ue belirlenen sorunları açıklanmı ş tır. INTRODUCTION It is seldom to find regions which are suitable to horticulture at various alti­ tutes from sea level up to 2.000 m in the world. Bursa has an important place among these regions having about 1.104.301 ha agricultural area according to the recent statistics (Anonymous 1983 c).
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Wetlands and Floodplain Areas in the Danube River Basin Final Report May 1999
    DANUBE POLLUTION REDUCTION PROGRAMME EVALUATION OF WETLANDS AND FLOODPLAIN AREAS IN THE DANUBE RIVER BASIN FINAL REPORT MAY 1999 Programme Coordination Unit UNDP/GEF Assistance prepared by WWF Danube-Carpathian-Programme and WWF-Auen-Institut (Germany) DANUBE POLLUTION REDUCTION PROGRAMME EVALUATION OF WETLANDS AND FLOODPLAIN AREAS IN THE DANUBE RIVER BASIN FINAL REPORT MAY 1999 Programme Coordination Unit UNDP/GEF Assistance prepared by WWF Danube-Carpathian-Programme and WWF-Auen-Institut (Germany) Preface The "Evaluation of Wetlands and Flkoodplain Areas in the Danube River Basin" study was prepared in the frame of the Danube Pollution Reduction Programme (PRP). The Study has been undertaken to define priority wetland and floodplain rehabilitation sites as a component of the Pollution reduction Programme. The present report addresses the identification of former floodplains and wetlands in the Danube River Basin, as well as the description of the current status and evaluation of the ecological importance of the potential for rehabilitation. Based on this evaluation, 17 wetland/floodplain sites have been identified for rehabilitation considering their ecological importance, their nutrient removal capacity and their role in flood protection. Most of the identified wetlands will require transboundary cooperation and represent an important first step in retoring the ecological balance in the Danube River Basin. The results are presented in the form of thematic maps that can be found in Annex I of the study. The study was prepared by the WWF-Danube-Carpathian-Programme and the WWF-Auen-Institut (Institute for Floodplains Ecology, WWF-Germany), under the guidance of the UNDP/GEF team of experts of the Danube Programme Coordination Unit (DPCU) in Vienna, Austria.
    [Show full text]
  • Talaat Pasha's Report on the Armenian Genocide.Fm
    Gomidas Institute Studies Series TALAAT PASHA’S REPORT ON THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE by Ara Sarafian Gomidas Institute London This work originally appeared as Talaat Pasha’s Report on the Armenian Genocide, 1917. It has been revised with some changes, including a new title. Published by Taderon Press by arrangement with the Gomidas Institute. © 2011 Ara Sarafian. All Rights Reserved. ISBN 978-1-903656-66-2 Gomidas Institute 42 Blythe Rd. London W14 0HA United Kingdom Email: [email protected] CONTENTS Introduction by Ara Sarafian 5 Map 18 TALAAT PASHA’S 1917 REPORT Opening Summary Page: Data and Calculations 20 WESTERN PROVINCES (MAP) 22 Constantinople 23 Edirne vilayet 24 Chatalja mutasarriflik 25 Izmit mutasarriflik 26 Hudavendigar (Bursa) vilayet 27 Karesi mutasarriflik 28 Kala-i Sultaniye (Chanakkale) mutasarriflik 29 Eskishehir vilayet 30 Aydin vilayet 31 Kutahya mutasarriflik 32 Afyon Karahisar mutasarriflik 33 Konia vilayet 34 Menteshe mutasarriflik 35 Teke (Antalya) mutasarriflik 36 CENTRAL PROVINCES (MAP) 37 Ankara (Angora) vilayet 38 Bolu mutasarriflik 39 Kastamonu vilayet 40 Janik (Samsun) mutasarriflik 41 Nigde mutasarriflik 42 Kayseri mutasarriflik 43 Adana vilayet 44 Ichil mutasarriflik 45 EASTERN PROVINCES (MAP) 46 Sivas vilayet 47 Erzerum vilayet 48 Bitlis vilayet 49 4 Talaat Pasha’s Report on the Armenian Genocide Van vilayet 50 Trebizond vilayet 51 Mamuretulaziz (Elazig) vilayet 52 SOUTH EASTERN PROVINCES AND RESETTLEMENT ZONE (MAP) 53 Marash mutasarriflik 54 Aleppo (Halep) vilayet 55 Urfa mutasarriflik 56 Diyarbekir vilayet
    [Show full text]
  • Edirne, Tekirdağ, Kırklareli Için Bütünleşik Kıyı Alanları Yönetim Planı
    Bu proje Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye Cumhuriyeti tarafından finanse edilmektedir. STRATEJİK ÇEVRESEL DEĞERLENDİRME YÖNETMELİĞİ’NİN UYGULANMASININ DESTEKLENMESİ PROJESİ Sözleşme No: TR2018 ESOP MI A3 12/CNP/03 Edirne, Tekirdağ, Kırklareli için Bütünleşik Kıyı Alanları Yönetim Planı KAPSAM BELİRLEME RAPORU -NİHAİ- NİSAN, 2020 Stratejik Çevresel Değerlendirme (SÇD) Yönetmeliği’nin Uygulanmasının Desteklenmesi Projesi TR2018 ESOP MI A3 12/CNP/03 Bu yayının içeriği yalnızca Eptisa Mühendislik liderliğindeki Konsorsiyumun sorumluluğundadır ve hiçbir şekilde Avrupa Birliği’nin görüşlerini yansıtmaz. Kapsam Belirleme Raporu – Bütünleşik Kıyı Alanları Yönetim Planı ii Stratejik Çevresel Değerlendirme (SÇD) Yönetmeliği’nin Uygulanmasının Desteklenmesi Projesi TR2018 ESOP MI A3 12/CNP/03 BELGE KONTROL ÇİZELGESİ Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı, Avrupa Birliği ve Dış İlişkiler Genel Sözleşme Makamı Müdürlüğü Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı, Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi, İzin ve Faydalanıcı Denetim Genel Müdürlüğü Proje Stratejik Çevresel Değerlendirme (SÇD) Yönetmeliği'nin Uygulanmasının Desteklenmesi Projesi EuropeAid No TR2018 ESOP MI A3 12/CNP/03 Başlık Kapsam Belirleme Raporu - Edirne, Tekirdağ, Kırklareli için Bütünleşik Kıyı Alanları Yönetim Planı Teslim Nihai - 29.04.2020 Hazırlayanlar Kontrol Eden Nihai İsim-Soyisim İsim-Soyisim Tarih Michal MUSIL 29.04.2020 Kıdemli Uluslararası SÇD Uzmanı Pınar Yılmaz Kıdemli Yerel SÇD Uzmanı Martin SMUTNY Buse Nur Hayta Takım Lideri Teknik Destek / Çevre Mühendisi Emre MELEK Kıdemli İnşaat Mühendisi / Kıyı ve
    [Show full text]